Page tree
Skip to end of metadata
Go to start of metadata



  • King

  • Dan Kiskis

  • J. J. Du Chateau
  • Jose Cedeno


  • Review charge and discuss adoption of existing models.

Discussion items

  1. Looking for another co-chair to join Louis & J.J. to help with planning.

  2. Should consider how EA is moving from artifact (standardization approach) to one more engaged with communities for aligning IT and business.
  3. May need to address what it means for a maturity model where the EA industry is changing as well.  Some of the standards are probably long lived, so perhaps EA maturity follows the same arc as business maturity.
  4. A goal of the maturity model may be that it should be resilient to future EA practice changes.  Should also take into consideration EA as a noun vs EA as a verb.
  5. A possible end product vision is a Structure and a Practice Guide
    1. Structure – Maturity model that describe various target maturities
    2. Practice Guide – A guide that contains what an EA practice does to reach, or be at, a given maturity level.
  6. Need to determine/decide which levels and attributes to address.
  7. Political reality may cause levels for each characteristics to vary.
  8. May want to capture and understand linkages and dependencies between maturity characteristics.  For example, if order to reach a high maturity level for a characteristic, one may need to be at some minimum maturity level for another characteristic.
  9. Goal for next meeting: Would like to have levels & attributes proposed by next meeting

Action items